8th amendment referendum part 3 - Mod note and FAQ in post #1

I'd like to address RobertKK's link to the Sunday Indo, and a few things in it.

A GP, Dr Judy Ceannt, told the crowd: "The basic law that governs our actions as doctors is first do no harm.

"We are not meant to intentionally kill or harm any patient, least of all the most helpless, the unborn baby. The government has no right to impose this on us."

Noone in government is imposing it. If a doctor doesn't believe in abortion, they are not being made do it.

Ms Charlie Fien, a Down syndrome activist, spoke against the targeting of Down syndrome children in the womb for abortion. She said: "Saving the Eighth will save the lives of babies with Down syndrome. Ireland is one of the only countries in the world where babies with Down syndrome are safe inside their mother's wombs."

Respectfully, I disagree. They're "safe" in

South America:
Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Gustamala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Nigaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Venezuela,

Sub-Saharan Africa:
Angola, Benin, Central African Rep.Chad, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Dem. Rep. of Congo, Gabon, Guinea- Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Madagascar, Mali, Mauretania, Mauritius, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Somalia, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda.

Middle East and North Africa:
Afghanistan, Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, Libya, Oman, Sudan (r), Syria, United Arab Emirates, Yemen.

Asia and Pacific:
Bangladesh, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Sri Lanka.

Europe:
Ireland, Malta.

where abortion is only permitted to "save" a womans life. But I doubt people with Downs Syndrome have a nice time in many of those countries, but I could be wrong.

Save the 8th Campaign manager Niamh Ui Bhriain said "Our message will be focused on ensuring that the Irish people vote 'No' to this extreme abortion referendum.

It's really not that extreme, and it's not about solely about abortion. It's about removing that ****up of an amendment. But she knows that.

"One of the heartbreaking facts we have seen emerging from Britain is that 90pc of babies with Down syndrome are aborted before birth. Charlie Fien's call to protect babies with a disability is hugely important."

This 90% has been shown to be an outright lie. Over and over. And protecting babies with disabilities IS important, no argument there. But that's not what we're arguing for!

Destiny Herndon-De La Rosa, who said she was a pro-life feminist, said abortion was "the ultimate exploitation of women, and is a symptom of women's oppression".

I thought Pro Life people didn't like blue hair, loud mouth feminists? And which is more of an "ultimate exploitation," allowing women to decide on their own medical treatment, and the family they bring into the world, or keeping that say out of their hands, and telling them they're babykillers?

Businessman Declan Ganley said the coming weeks would be "a battle between the people and the powerful - with the political elites and the taxpayer-funded lobby groups on one side, and the ordinary people on the other".

Hah. Declan Ganley? **** off. Seriously. He's one to talk about lobby groups and funding. And political elite? Is he just sore that he couldn't get a mandate from the Irish people to become one of these elite?

Mattie McGrath TD said abortion clinics would set up in Ireland seeking business despite assurances from the Government that clinics would not be established if the amendment was repealed.

Oh look, Mattie being "ignorant" on a situation, colour me suprised.

RobertKK wrote: »

It is Google helping the Yes side since they have done a really bad job online.

Im sure it is. Or maybe its just them stopping misleading info being spread?

NuMarvel wrote: »

Google and Facebook are levelling the playing field. But I can see why you're afraid of a fair fight .

Yes....who have all political party leaders supporting them, who have state bodies who get tax payers money supporting yes, the media is behind yes, the celebs lets not forget them...lol
Yes side is the establishment vote.

Of course Yes don't want a fair fight as they are worried that the No side are winning the hearts and minds for the hearts and minds of all human lives, not just some human lives.

Are there any Yes posters up that mention the unborn given we will be voting to keep or remove their right to life?
It does appear Yes are afraid of the unborn life in this debate.
Yes for some lives matter.
No for all lives matter.

ASISEEIT wrote: »

Basically this debate comes down to the following- do you accept or reject fact that the life in the womb is a baby and thus worthy of prorection. Its not about whether you want the child or not. There are unwanted children in the world and we don't shoot them because of that.

Incorrect it comes down to do you believe the 8th amendment is correct wen is says the life of a woman is equal to the life of the unborn regardless of it's gestational age

ASISEEIT wrote: »

Rape and fatal foetal anomalies are side issues. Pregnancies by rape are statitically small.
If however you passed a law allowing abortion for just that i would support it because of the non consent issue. The rest of us humping and bumping know the consequences
There is no accepted medical term for FFA so no law could be designed to allow it but we can't slaughter others to satisty a tiny miniority. If we made laws like that we would ban a huge amount of stuff

more than one woman a week gets this news. You've also said you'd give rights to women raped but not those who receive a diagnosis of incompatible with life? Why not make a case for a law whereby when a diagnosis of incompatibility with life is given and confirmed by 2 physicians women will be afforded the right to terminate
Oh yeah you can't do either of those things without repealing the 8th

ASISEEIT wrote: »

Adoption is a real option and people should realise the law has radically changed. Its no longer a case of no contact with your child if you put him or her up for adoption

Adoption is not an option for women who can't carry a pregnancy for health reasons, or are they another minority that don't matter. Should we chuck them on the sacrificial pyre too? What about women who don't want to be pregnant

ASISEEIT wrote: »

The bodily integrity argument is bull because if taken to logical conclusion would permit prostitution,self harm and heroin addiction

It is not illegal in Ireland to self harm, prostitution is also not illegal (though solicitation is) it's actually not illegal to be addicted to heroin either, it's illegal to use opiates and to sell or possess them but not to be addicted to them

ASISEEIT wrote: »

I cant support anything that would allow a doctor to scrap out arms,legs and skull of a baby . End of story . 12 weeks my backside. Proposed law allows that to be extended under circumstances and we know what happened in England after 1967

You don't have to, you only have to support the repeal of the 8th amendment, which is what you're being asked to vote on.
How many times do people have to tell you that an abortion up to 12 weeks is 2 pills and not a surgical procedure.

I know what happened in England after '67 91% of abortions happened at 12 weeks or earlier (2016 figures) 12 weeks your backside was it?
Additionally what happened in England is not necessarily relevant, Spain another country with a strong catholic tradition legalised abortion in the first trimester in 2010 and their abortion rate declined. Why would we be more like the English and not like the Spanish?

Your points don't actually have a leg to stand on

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes....who have all political party leaders supporting them, who have state bodies who get tax payers money supporting yes, the media is behind yes, the celebs lets not forget them...lol
Yes side is the establishment vote.
.

What state bodies? The media?

seamus wrote: »

Because it's challenging the direction by SIPO, as anybody is entitled to do.

Of course, the effect is the same; until that issue is decided, the money is not being spent. So that should make you happy.

The panic from the No side about the ban on advertising is incredibly telling in terms of where they believed their battleground to be, and how their funds were being directed.

When will we get a judgement on that?

After the referendum when it is too late?
Do you think it was good that Soros and others like him have been financing stuff in this country, meeting Irish politicians at the request of Soros, surely with all the accusations from the Yes side that No are getting outside help, that you want Soros to be given his money back and accountability on what Soros discusses with Irish politicians?

patrickSTARR wrote: »

Because it kills a life

I don’t believe that it does. I repeat the question.

RobertKK wrote: »

So you are saying you have no evidence?

I have not called any woman a murderer in any of these 8th amendment threads.

You can hardly talk about anyone else having no evidence, you were chased for pages to provide factual evidence represented by statistics and reports to back up your ridiculous claim that most of the women who abort due to grounds of mental health (97%) do so for lifestyle choices and career-related reasons.

You have yet to provide anything to back up your speculation, I doubt you will.

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

If abortion is on demand here, it will normalise it, more will be tempted to terminate a pregnancy rather than keep the child.

patrickSTARR wrote: »

If abortion is on demand here, it will normalise it, more will be tempted to terminate a pregnancy rather than keep the child.

what are you basing that outlandish assumption on? do you think women are that fickle. "I was going to have the baby but sure the clinic is only round the corner so I might aswell"